suspicious RCU usage from smack code
John Garry
john.garry at huawei.com
Tue Feb 25 17:59:46 UTC 2020
Hi guys,
JFYI, When I enable CONFIG_PROVE_RCU=y, I get these:
[ 0.369697] WARNING: suspicious RCU usage
[ 0.374179] 5.6.0-rc3-00002-g619882231229-dirty #1753 Not tainted
[ 0.380974] -----------------------------
[ 0.385455] security/smack/smack_lsm.c:354 RCU-list traversed in
non-reader section!!
[ 0.394183]
[ 0.394183] other info that might help us debug this:
[ 0.394183]
[ 0.403107]
[ 0.403107] rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 1
[ 0.410389] no locks held by kthreadd/2.
[ 0.414770]
[ 0.414770] stack backtrace:
[ 0.419636] CPU: 0 PID: 2 Comm: kthreadd Not tainted
5.6.0-rc3-00002-g619882231229-dirty #1753
[ 0.429204] Call trace:
[ 0.431924] dump_backtrace+0x0/0x298
[ 0.435990] show_stack+0x14/0x20
[ 0.439674] dump_stack+0x118/0x190
[ 0.443548] lockdep_rcu_suspicious+0xe0/0x120
[ 0.448487] smack_cred_prepare+0x2f8/0x310
[ 0.453134] security_prepare_creds+0x64/0xe0
[ 0.457979] prepare_creds+0x25c/0x368
[ 0.462141] copy_creds+0x40/0x620
[ 0.465918] copy_process+0x62c/0x25e0
[ 0.470084] _do_fork+0xc0/0x998
[ 0.473667] kernel_thread+0xa0/0xc8
[ 0.477640] kthreadd+0x2b0/0x408
[ 0.481325] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x18
[ 18.804382] =============================
[ 18.808872] WARNING: suspicious RCU usage
[ 18.813348] 5.6.0-rc3-00002-g619882231229-dirty #1753 Not tainted
[ 18.820145] -----------------------------
[ 18.824621] security/smack/smack_access.c:87 RCU-list traversed in
non-reader section!!
[ 18.833544]
[ 18.833544] other info that might help us debug this:
[ 18.833544]
[ 18.842465]
[ 18.842465] rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 1
[ 18.849741] no locks held by kdevtmpfs/781.
[ 18.854410]
[ 18.854410] stack backtrace:
[ 18.859277] CPU: 1 PID: 781 Comm: kdevtmpfs Not tainted
5.6.0-rc3-00002-g619882231229-dirty #1753
[ 18.869138] Call trace:
[ 18.871860] dump_backtrace+0x0/0x298
[ 18.875929] show_stack+0x14/0x20
[ 18.879612] dump_stack+0x118/0x190
[ 18.883489] lockdep_rcu_suspicious+0xe0/0x120
[ 18.888428] smk_access_entry+0x110/0x128
[ 18.892885] smk_tskacc+0x70/0xe8
[ 18.896568] smk_curacc+0x64/0x78
[ 18.900249] smack_inode_permission+0x110/0x1c8
[ 18.905284] security_inode_permission+0x50/0x98
[ 18.910412] inode_permission+0x70/0x1d0
[ 18.914768] link_path_walk.part.38+0x4a8/0x778
[ 18.919802] path_lookupat+0xd0/0x1a8
[ 18.923871] filename_lookup+0xf0/0x1f8
[ 18.928136] user_path_at_empty+0x48/0x58
[ 18.932590] ksys_chdir+0x8c/0x138
[ 18.936366] devtmpfsd+0x148/0x448
[ 18.940146] kthread+0x1c8/0x1d0
[ 18.943732] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x18
I haven't had a chance to check whether they are bogus or not.
Thanks,
John
More information about the Linux-security-module-archive
mailing list